[meteorite-list] WG: Asian falls

[Jeff Kuyken]

>logic would lead us to conclude that prohibitive export laws are not the 
>culprit.

My personal belief is that this is correct. Export laws can work and Canada 
is an example of that. The problem here is not the federal export laws but 
the individual state laws (W.A., S.A. & N.T. in particular) which grant 
ownership of any meteorites to the state. Basically it seems that people 
finding new material now just don't report it as they will not be able to 
keep it. Get rid of those laws and I guarantee the official find rate will 
steadily rise.

Cheers,

Jeff

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jason Utas" <meteoritekid at gmail.com>
To: "Meteorite-list" <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2010 7:23 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] WG: Asian falls


Martin, All,
I would like to point out that the law prohibiting the approved export
of meteorites from Australia, the "Protection of Movable Cultural
Heritage Act," was passed in 1986.

309 meteorites have been recovered, analyzed, and officially published
in Australia since then, not including the relict iron recently found.

Breaking statistics up by date alone can lead to deceiving
conclusions.  Most of the meteorites found in Australia in the past
thirty years were found between 1990 and 1994, several years after the
prohibitive laws had been passed.

So, yes, it's true that relatively few meteorites have been found in
Australia in the past decade.  But no new laws were introduced around
the year 2000, so logic would lead us to conclude that prohibitive
export laws are not the culprit.

Why, then, did rates fall so dramatically?  I'm not sure.

I'm guessing it was the influx of Saharan and NWA meteorites that
caused market prices to bottom out.  All of a sudden, a CK4 like
Maralinga wasn't worth untold hundreds per gram.  Stones like Camel
Donga and Millbillillie have dropped to thirty or so percent of what
they used to sell for -- and ordinary chondrites like Hamilton, Cook
007 and others now sell on ebay for cents per gram, instead of the few
dollars or so they fetched ten or more years ago.

And the subsistence wage in Australia is considerably higher than in
Morocco (it takes more money to live above the poverty line).  So
while someone in Morocco might be able to live reasonably well if they
sell their stones for a few cents per gram, the same is likely not
true for someone in Australia.

That's my best guess, anyways.  If you go through the Meteoritical
Bulletin, you'll notice that very few, if any, of the meteorites were
actually found by meteorite dealers; they were found by Aussies, and
they were found well after the passing of the 1986 law.

Regards,
Jason




On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Martin Altmann
<altmann at meteorite-martin.de> wrote:
> Because I'm very content with Canada.
>
> They learned from the Tagish Lake debacle.
> And eased afterwards the strictest interpretation, their laws allowed in
> practice.
> With better results following.
> Buzzard Coulee got therefore a much higher tkw and a better availability 
> for
> everyone, institutions and private collectors;
> you saw how suddenly new masses of Springwater were found;
> or remember that crater building iron - I forgot the name.
>
> Never the right of ownership was challenged by Canadian laws, but only 
> what
> finders could do with their property, in past leading to such bizarre
> situations, that the owner of the second St-Robert stone, desperately 
> wanted
> to sell, but was not able to do so, because no Canadian institute was
> interested in, although he asked not more the Canadian survey had paid for
> the 1st stone, but on the other hand, wasn't allowed to sell it outside of
> Canada - a legally more than unsatisfying situation.
>
> Meanwhile Canadian institutes allow export clearance for all stones, they
> don't need.
> O.k. it's somewhat uncomfortable and takes time, but it is fair.
> They pay very fair prices for Canadian finds, if they decide to acquire
> them. (not anymore that funny reward proposed on radio: 100$ per stone 
> found
> of Tagish Lake ;-).
>
> And you don't have to forget, that in contrast to such countries with
> prohibition like Algeria, Poland, Argentina with all in all no scientific
> interest in meteorites, or countries with constitutionally more than
> problematic laws like Australia and so on,
> the Canadians maintain a real good meteorite science and a vivid
> institutional collecting,
> of course also including the important hot desert finds.
>
> So all in all, Canada would be a very good example (unfortunately so far 
> the
> ooonly example) for meteoricists like e.g. Bevan, suffering under the
> unreasonable legislation of their countries, how it could be done better.
>
> Best!
> Martin
>
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
> [mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von Chris
> Spratt
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 30. Dezember 2010 01:26
> An: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] WG: Asian falls
>
> You left out Canada.
>
> Chris
> (Via my iPhone)
> ______________________________________________
> Visit the Archives at
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
> ______________________________________________
> Visit the Archives at 
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at 
http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list